INFORMATION

This website uses cookies to store information on your computer. Some of these cookies are essential to make our site work and others help us to improve by giving us some insight into how the site is being used. For further information, see our Privacy Policy.

Modern economics

Any topic related to science can be discussed here.
Message
Author
User avatar
Dave B
Posts: 17809
Joined: May 17th, 2010, 9:15 pm

Re: Modern economics

#1401 Postby Dave B » October 26th, 2015, 7:47 am

Latest post of the previous page:

animist wrote:
Dave B wrote:Not sure I agree with all he has said, but his comments about Irael and the US struck resonances with me.

When did Chomsky become a "political theorist", would say he tends more towards the philosophical side, but, thin line between I suppose.

Dave, for one thing, political theory is a branch of philosophy, and also, Chomsky was criticising US policy back in the bad old days of the Vietnam War

Just call me a victim of my own selective reading!

Can't disagree with him on America policy.
"Look forward; yesterday was a lesson, if you did not learn from it you wasted it."
Me, 2015

User avatar
Dave B
Posts: 17809
Joined: May 17th, 2010, 9:15 pm

Re: Modern economics

#1402 Postby Dave B » January 27th, 2016, 7:36 pm

Perhaps this needs a topic of its own!
https://www.ted.com/talks/yanis_varoufakis_capitalism_will_eat_democracy_unless_we_speak_up

The speaker describes "twin peaks", I think I see something more like a peak and a cave - with a barrier between them to stop the peak trickling down. It's almost a kind of sovial Darwinism, the winners are those with too much to spend anyway or those willing to stretch the law to breaking point. The weapons of survival are huge resources of power, in the form of capital, or the willingness to stab others in the back, climb out of the cave by treading on their heads.

Now, what might comprises that barrier? Personal greed? Governments determined to maintain a status quo? Preferential treatment?
"Look forward; yesterday was a lesson, if you did not learn from it you wasted it."
Me, 2015

User avatar
Nick
Posts: 11025
Joined: July 4th, 2007, 10:10 am

Re: Modern economics

#1403 Postby Nick » February 15th, 2016, 10:05 pm


User avatar
John G
Posts: 74
Joined: February 3rd, 2016, 2:44 am

Re: Modern economics

#1404 Postby John G » February 17th, 2016, 2:42 am

Dave B wrote:
animist wrote:
Dave B wrote:Not sure I agree with all he has said, but his comments about Irael and the US struck resonances with me.

When did Chomsky become a "political theorist", would say he tends more towards the philosophical side, but, thin line between I suppose.

Dave, for one thing, political theory is a branch of philosophy, and also, Chomsky was criticising US policy back in the bad old days of the Vietnam War

Just call me a victim of my own selective reading!

Can't disagree with him on America policy.


For a critical review of Chomsky and to better understand his take on things I suggest reading this

http://www.russilwvong.com/future/chomsky.html

I have never met Chomsky. I happen to know the author of the article, a real life friend, so I am biased. The article is well written. Chomsky is a linguist. A cunning one. He uses all the tools at his disposal to make his point. So take everything he says with more than a grain of salt.
A good learner is forever walking the narrow path between blindness and hallucination. ― Pedro Domingos, The Master Algorithm

User avatar
Dave B
Posts: 17809
Joined: May 17th, 2010, 9:15 pm

Re: Modern economics

#1405 Postby Dave B » March 16th, 2016, 8:36 am

Listening to pre-budget item, on Today, from tge Lodon Gateway.

Imports high, exports low - except for financial etc services and high-end stuff.

Strikes me that those fihacial etc services employ low numbers of highly qualified staff - who seem to do their best not to pay taxes in the UK.

The high end tech industry is not the country's biggest bunch of employers, so not that many high pay tax payers there either. Probably not high volume exports either. So our industrial base withers further. They admitted that we export mainly fresh air from London Gateway in terms of empty, returned containers. And it is intended to make it three times larger.

Meanwhile we import the mundane stuff, mainly from China, so only VAT on that, plus tax on any non-fiddled profits. But since this stuff increasingly imported direct via Amazon et al . . . So no import duty or VAT.

Low level jobs geing taken by imigrants and foreign workers, seemingly with pressure to keep wages at minimum.

Sounds like a shit economy to me, Thatcher started it and her spawn carry on the same model.
"Look forward; yesterday was a lesson, if you did not learn from it you wasted it."
Me, 2015

User avatar
Nick
Posts: 11025
Joined: July 4th, 2007, 10:10 am

Re: Modern economics

#1406 Postby Nick » March 16th, 2016, 8:54 am

Dave B wrote:Listening to pre-budget item, on Today, from tge Lodon Gateway.

Imports high, exports low - except for financial etc services and high-end stuff.
One reason for this is the parlous state of the European economy, in contrast to the UK.

Strikes me that those fihacial etc services employ low numbers of highly qualified staff - who seem to do their best not to pay taxes in the UK.
Sorry, Dave, but you are quite simply wrong on this point. UK employees pay UK tax on their UK earnings.

The high end tech industry is not the country's biggest bunch of employers, so not that many high pay tax payers there either. Probably not high volume exports either. So our industrial base withers further. They admitted that we export mainly fresh air from London Gateway in terms of empty, returned containers. And it is intended to make it three times larger.
If we are importing, say, fridges, and exporting, say, computer games, this is inevitable, and not necessarily a bad thing. And our industrial base has been rising all this time. But not in employment terms, because of automation, and not as a proportion of the economy, as other sectors, in which we have a comparative advantage, grow faster.

Meanwhile we import the mundane stuff, mainly from China, so only VAT on that, plus tax on any non-fiddled profits. But since this stuff increasingly imported direct via Amazon et al . . . So no import duty or VAT.
Sorry, Dave, but wrong again. Import duties are generally a bad thing, and buying via Amazon is still subject to VAT.

Low level jobs geing taken by imigrants and foreign workers, seemingly with pressure to keep wages at minimum.

Sounds like a shit economy to me, Thatcher started it and her spawn carry on the same model.
Oh dear. It was Blair's government who opened the floodgates to immigrants, it is the Tories who are raising the minimum wage, and before Thatcher came to power, the economy was so dire that there was a net outflow of migrants from Britain. Sure, the UK faces problems, but compared to many other economies, we are the land of milk and honey.

User avatar
Dave B
Posts: 17809
Joined: May 17th, 2010, 9:15 pm

Re: Modern economics

#1407 Postby Dave B » March 16th, 2016, 11:35 am

Yes, Nick.

Who gives a shit who started what? Ancient history, as I have so fucking often mentioned before - and where you seem to live.

It is still a shit economy system today, in terms of "ordinary people", that the present bunch are maintaining if not overtly encouraging. Yes, increase the minimum wage, so long as more and more people live, struggle, on that because mostly crap jobs are available (unless you have a degree from an approved uni, went to Eton, know the right people . . .)

I will not bother to respond furtyer to your references to the past, Nick, it is your sole defence for this government and a waste of time and effort.
"Look forward; yesterday was a lesson, if you did not learn from it you wasted it."
Me, 2015

User avatar
Nick
Posts: 11025
Joined: July 4th, 2007, 10:10 am

Re: Modern economics

#1408 Postby Nick » March 16th, 2016, 11:22 pm

Dave B wrote:Yes, Nick.

Who gives a shit who started what? Ancient history, as I have so fucking often mentioned before - and where you seem to live.
Er... 'scuse me? It was you who mentioned Thatcher, even more ancient than Blair, so don't come the raw prawn with me on that one!

It is still a shit economy system today, in terms of "ordinary people", that the present bunch are maintaining if not overtly encouraging. Yes, increase the minimum wage, so long as more and more people live, struggle, on that because mostly crap jobs are available (unless you have a degree from an approved uni, went to Eton, know the right people . . .)

I will not bother to respond further to your references to the past, Nick, it is your sole defence for this government and a waste of time and effort.
Those who do not understand the past are condemned to repeat it.

User avatar
Dave B
Posts: 17809
Joined: May 17th, 2010, 9:15 pm

Re: Modern economics

#1409 Postby Dave B » March 17th, 2016, 9:03 am

Granted I mentioned Thatcher, but as a reason we are where we are now rather than an excuse for the current bunch's behaviour.

And I wholeheartedly agree that, "Those who do not understand the past are condemned to repeat it." This is aptly demonstrated in parliament almost every day. Still running on ideological paradigms that their grandfathers would recognise.
"Look forward; yesterday was a lesson, if you did not learn from it you wasted it."
Me, 2015

User avatar
Dave B
Posts: 17809
Joined: May 17th, 2010, 9:15 pm

Re: Modern economics

#1410 Postby Dave B » June 17th, 2016, 7:49 pm

Well, well, what a surprise. Though it is off the curve of the things I thought about China's latest ploy is well within the set.

My paranoid theory was that Chinacwoukd flood the West with cheap imports until Western industry broke down - then up the price. This is, of course, whilst buying up Western debt, property and industries. All good capitalist stuff . . . Er, thought they were anti-capitalist? Silly me.

So, now China has accused Apple of infringing the patents of a small Beijing manufacturer by producing a phone that looks like the Chinese one.

Seems this might not be the only action of this type, other companies are finding strange barriers being errected against importing theirvtechnology and goods.

When I worked for ABB India insisted that, after the first import of technology ftom the West, companies had to supply the means to msnufacture those itens in India. So India got technology at least two steps behind the state of the art back then. Now they have grown their own industries - but all too often the quality control is crap. Like the Russians in the 50s-70s, volume of output was more important than quality.

Possibility of China going the same way, they have been infringing Western patenents for a long time, but producing inferior quality items. Quality improves but at a cost they are feeling. My Chinese imitation Samsung lasted in the sane ratio as the prices, quarter the cost lasted less than a year. But, hey, most people change their phone every year so what's the problem?

Hmm, didn't hear of Samsung complaining that China had marketted a look-alike . . .

Devious these Chinese.
"Look forward; yesterday was a lesson, if you did not learn from it you wasted it."
Me, 2015


Return to “Sciences and pseudo-science”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 4 guests